Hon’ble Mrs. Ranjana Pandya, J.—Since both the afore-captioned criminal appeals have been filed against the judgment and order dated 5.8.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Agra in Sessions Trial No. 510 of 2010 (State v. Surendra Kushwaha) and Sessions Trial No. 885 of 2010 (State v. Rinku), hence they are being decided by this common order.

2. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment and order dated 5.8.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Agra in Sessions Trial No. 510 of 2010 (State v. Surendra Kushwaha) and Sessions Trial No. 885 of 2010 (State v. Rinku) arising out of Case Crime No. 387 of 2009, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, Police Station Barhan, District Agra, whereby the accused appellants Surendra Kushwaha and Rinku have been convicted and sentenced to four years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000/- each under Section 363/34 IPC; five years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5000/- each under Section 366/34 IPC and ten years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 20,000/- each under Section 376(2)(g) IPC with default stipulation. Out of the fine amount so deposited by the accused-appellants, 60% of the same was directed to be paid to the victim. The accused Pramod was declared juvenile.

3. Filtering out the unnecessary details, the case of the prosecution in short compass is that the informant Ramesh Kumar has given a written report, Ext. Ka-1 at 11.30 a.m., to the police station Barhan, district Agra scribed by Suresh Chandra to the effect that his daughter, the victim aged 14 years had gone to Government Intermediate College, Barhan on 7.12.2009 where she was studying in Class-X. She used to come back home at 4.00 p.m., but on that date, she did not return. A hectic search was made, but she could not be traced out. An acquaintance of the informant Gulab Singh, PW 2, resident of Barhan told him that on Monday, he saw the accused Surendra, Narottam Singh, Neeraj, Rinku and Praveen all resident of Barhan and Triloki, resident of Nagla Maddey talking each other at Gobal crossing. The victim was also standing near them fearfully. When the informant went to their houses, they were not present. Their family members did not provide any information to him and rather started quarreling with him.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, the then Constable-Clerk Bhagwan Singh, PW 8 prepared the chik FIR, which was proved as Ext. Ka-11 and report was lodged against the accused at case crime No. 387 of 2009, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, which was entered in the G.D. at serial No. 20 at 11.30 a.m. on 10.12.2009, copy whereof has been proved as Ext. Ka-12.

5. After registration of the case, primary investigation of the case was entrusted to S.I., Satpal Singh. Thereafter, the investigation of the case was transferred to S.I., Vijay Singh, PW-7, who recovered the victim from Railway Station, Barhan and prepared its recovery memo as Ext. Ka-3 and prepared the site plan of the recovery and proved the same as Ext. Ka-8. After recovery, the victim was sent to the District Women Hospital, Agra. The Investigating Officer, after collecting the medical report, requested the Magistrate concerned for recording the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr. P.C. which was proved as Ext. Ka-4. He inspected the place on the pointing of the victim and prepared site plan and proved as Ext. Ka-9. After giving the victim in the custody of her father, he prepared Supurdginama and proved it as Ext. Ka-2.

6. To bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution has examined as many as 11 witnesses.

7. PW-1 is Ramesh Kumar, the informant of the case. He reiterated the versions given in the written report. He produced the photocopy of the certificate of High School of the victim. He further stated that when he was searching his daughter, he came to know that the victim had been recovered by the police from the Railway Station. On being asked,